Baz, Mainly, the "server" scope needs to contain things that are germane to the entire server. It's probably frowned on because folks would put things in the server scope that belong in the application scope - like DSN names or settings for example.
-Mark -----Original Message----- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 8:52 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: SERVER scope Thanks guys, Why is it frowned upon by the way? I've heard such talk before, that's why I ask, but I'm not sure of the reasons. Baz -----Original Message----- From: Mark A Kruger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 5:41 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: SERVER scope If as you say this library is "server wide" then I say go for it :) But make sure and check to see if it already exists and only instantiate it once - othewise whats' the point? -mark -----Original Message----- From: Baz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 4:25 PM To: CF-Talk Subject: SERVER scope Hi, I have a CFC that I use across all applications. It's basically a global UDF library that stores no data. Is it ok to store this CFC in the SERVER scope rather than the application scope? Is using a named lock for this ok: <cflock name="ServerUtils" type="exclusive"> <cfset Server.Utils=createObject('Component','SystemUtils') /> </cflock> Cheers, Baz ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:232922 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
